Arles

Our last port on the river cruise was the ancient city of Arles, on the Rhône river but also practically on the Mediterranean coast in Provence. The Romans first saw the strategic value in a settlement here, controlling the river route into Gaul. The city lies near marshes and a nature preserve (the Camargue) that helps it retain a certain out-of-the-way, reserved character.

Arles is proud of its Roman heritage, and the ancient local language, Provençal, is more akin to Latin then French, although of course French predominates today. Arles retains a Roman coliseum, a theater, baths, an aqueduct: all the trappings of Imperial Rome. Its coliseum has an interesting history. In the Middle Ages, it was occupied by locals who made it into a small walled-town-within-the-town, full of little houses and shops. Eventually, the city government evicted everyone and re-established the arena. In fact, they still use the coliseum for bull fights, either of the Spanish (killing the bull) or French (irritating the bull) variety.

Arles is as charming as a painting, as in a van Gogh painting. He spent a few troubled months here (as everywhere) generating over 300 hundred paintings of landmarks still visible today. Oh, and yes, he cut off his ear here, too. Picasso and Gaugin also spent productive time here, but left bodily intact. Few if any of these great artists’ work remains here.

Cafe
Cafe. . . at night? Look familiar?

We also visited the remains of the historic fortress village of Les Baux de Provence. This was an independent town nestled in formidable, rocky hills north-east of Arles. This one-time principality held out for hundreds of years before finally being sacked and destoyed by the French under Cardinal Richelieu. To keep the fort from ever proving a problem again, the French army leveled it, although the town itself remains. Unfortunately, to add insult to injury, the town has become a tourist trap where only a few people actually live, the prices are high, and the tour groups run non-stop. C’est la vie! At least real history happened here, and the views are amazing. There was one hidden gem: we found a small 12th century church (intact) with some amazing stained-glass windows, donated by the Prince of Monaco (who once held title to the area) as a peace gesture. Somehow the modern glass fits perfectly well in the ancient setting:

Arles and Provence have much to offer. We didn’t get to visit any lavender fields, but we did get to taste some Provençal olive oil, which is hard to find outside of France. They export some (to the States) but mostly produce fresh for the French markets, as locals prefer the lighter, softer tastes (compared to Italian or Greek olive oil). Hard to blame them, but I guess that makes them, well, provincial and Provençal!

A: Ex-cursing

Q: what do you call the action of going on excursions?

As we’ve sailed down the Saône and Rhône, we’ve had the chance to take several group tours (excursions in the parlance of cruises) and a few personal side trips, too. This being France, and wine country to boot, we’ve done a few vintners.

The first was called Château de Chasselas, near the town of Mâcon. The village of Chasselas lies literally on the dividing line between the Bourgogne (Chardonnay) and Beaujolais areas. One could look at the hillside fields on one side of town and see grapes destined to be Chardonnay, while on the other side of town the grapes were headed to Beaujolais. We tasted Chardonnay while learning of the travails of the vintner, who left the high-intensity world of Paris fashion to start a family-run winery, which is also high-risk. I guess the grapes are less temperamental than Parisian fashion critics!

Next we tried Beaujolais at a winery called Domaine Paire, a family-run affair for over 400 years! Jean-Jacques recently turned over the business to his son, but he happily gave us a lesson in Beaujolais, especially the difference between the Nouveau (which has turned into something of an event despite being of, shall we say, “fresh” quality) and Cru Beaujolais which has all of the body, depth, and aroma of great French wine. We practiced the subtle art of wine tasting (first eye, then nose, then mouth) under the master’s friendly tutleage. Nothing beats a little learning reinforced with practical exercise. I looked forward to the homework!

Cherchez la femme! (with the flag)

Of course, excursion tours also involve following the flag (your cruise tour guide), while listening to a receiver hanging from your lanyard connected to an earpiece in your ear! We visited the tiny hamlet of Oingt. Bonus if you guess how to pronounce it: like a baby’s cry: “WAAH.” Once an abandoned medieval ruin, Oingt was gradually reclaimed and rebuilt by artisans and now serves as charming–albeit touristy–photo op. Still, it does provide amazing set-pieces, so why not?

Another mandatory tour stop was at Les Halles de Lyon, to which the name of chef Paul Bocuse was added after he died in 2018. This market is filled with the very best of wine, meat, fish, cheese, chocolate, bread and all things culinary. You can shop, sample, or just browse, but I guarantee you will gain five pounds even just looking!

We went off on our own to brave the wild transport system of Lyon (actually very easy to use) and visit la Maison des Canuts: the silk-weavers museum. It was a small affair, jam-packed with information about the centuries-long history of silk weaving associated with Lyon. The Canuts, or weavers, were mainstays of Lyonnais working culture, and even famously rebelled in the 1830s over government regulation (such rebellions are a passion in France). Canut culture inaugurated the bouchons (which we covered previously), the traboules (ditto), and are essential to understanding Lyon, although the Canuts themselves are in the main long-gone.

In Avignon, we ditched the crowd to find a church for Sunday Mass. Now you might think finding a church in Catholic France, let alone the one-time seat of the papacy (French Kings held various Popes hostage in Avignon for sixty-seven years) would be easy, and you would be . . . right. Despite France’s increasing secularization, we easily found the 10:00 am Sunday Mass at Avignon’s Cathedral Notre-Dame Des Doms.

Just another 12th Century Cathedral!

And we did another wine-tasting! This time Chateauneuf du Pape at the Bouachon vineyard in the heart of Provence:

Even my Irish liver needed a rest from all this rich French food and wine!

A few fleeting shots of Avignon as we near the cruise end:

Cruising (River Style)

We’re on a long-delayed (two years) Avalon Waterways river cruise down the Saône and Rhône rivers in France. If you’ve never taken a river cruise, or especially if you have done only ocean cruises, you owe it to yourself to try out a river cruise, especially in Europe.

What’s so good about them? First off, it lacks the bag-drag (in common with ocean cruises). You unpack once, then visit multiple places. However, unlike ocean cruises which often drop you via a tender or in a slightly seedy port area, river cruises (especially in Europe) often leave you in the middle of town, with easy access to everything.

Next, river cruise ships are smaller, so they are manageable. You can’t possibly get lost on one, and they’re easy to navigate. The other side of this is they lack some of the extravagant attractions of ocean cruises: no climbing walls, water slides, or go-cart tracks. Maybe a tiny gym, a single closet-sized spa, no casino, no art auctions, no shops. Depending on your tastes, these may all be good or bad.

Unlike ocean cruises, which usually cruise overnight, leaving you to visit a new port each day, river ships cruise both during the day and night. Seeing the countryside is part of the experience (the ocean view rarely changes, except when entering/leaving port), and it is not at all unusal to go on an excursion from one place and meet back up with the ship in another place. There are also opportunities on river cruises to go out on your own (picnic, ride bikes, etc.) and meet up with the cruise down the river (of course, with prior coordination).

Avalon Poetry II, the big one

Because of the smaller size, the river cruise experience is more intimate. With 1-200 people on board, you may literally meet everyone during the cruise. There are no assigned seats, but there are assigned meal times (snacks and quick bites are available other times), where you choose your meal companions (or dine alone). Menu options often include regional fare bought that day, so it’s fresh and authentic, but that means fewer choices, too.

Like ocean cruises, lines have reputations (party boats, specialty themes, more or less formal) so it pays to research. Also, lines offer wildly disparate options, so comparing prices is a chore: free drinks versus Wifi packages versus free excursions, for example. And on river cruises, the itinerary is far more important than the ship. There are no “days at sea,” so your cabin is mostly a bed and place to freshen up, and the ship a means to get from here to there. Which is not to say it’s any less luxurious: the crew to passenger ratios are very similar, depending upon the line.

Low bridge

Some of the oddities of river cruising? Your cabin may have a balcony or floor-to-ceiling windows. But when you dock in a town, the cruise ships all line-up side-by-side, connected. Which means when you throw open your window, you may be looking directly into the cabin on the ship next door! It does make embarking and disembarking interesting, as the crews make sure you get to the correct ship.

Your morning wake-up view

Long ago in Europe, news that the Vikings were coming spread terror throughout the land. Now that river cruising in Europe has exploded–with Viking Cruises leading the way as the mass-market choice–history repeats itself. One doesn’t get the frenzy that accompanies several ocean cruise ships disgorging all at once (ever see Venice during this experience? It’s worse than a flood!), but you can find yourself hitting the same tourist sites at the same time, all following along your designated flag and getting the same packaged tours. But river cruises often allow you to skip off on your own, too.

Crossing a lock in the early evening

Like ocean cruises, there are options to fit every budget and traveling style. Want a weeklong cruise in a wine region where you only go one hundred kilometers? They got that. Want the grand tour from the Atlantic to the Black Sea via the Rhine, Main, and Danube? Got that too. Cruises aimed at local foods, wines, history? Check!

The river cruising set skews even older than the ocean cruising demographic. River cruises are generally more expensive, and they never attract the hard partyers, Spring-breakers, or casino enthusiasts. They are more sedate, more seasoned travellers, and more independent. Most Americans are familar with ocean cruises due to the numerous Carribean and Pacific cruises; river cruises in the States are just starting to take hold.

It’s possible (but highly unlikely) that you may get seasick on a river cruise. Weather plays out differentlythan on ocean ships: you’ll see no videos like those of ocean cruises which encounter heavy seas or hurricanes, but very-low or high water on a river cruise can result in bus transfers (around bridges) or even hotel stays. If it disrupts the cruise significantly, I have heard of cruise lines offering full refunds (in the form of future cruise credits).

Like ocean cruises, you’ll only get a taste of the towns you visit. It’s great if you want to try out a region, or if you already know a place and just want to make a quick re-visit. You will be well-fed (and drink-ed), pampered, and there are plenty of opportunties to go off on your own. Most lines have pre- and post-cruise extensions, which often give you a few days in major cities like Prague, Nice, or Barcelona, which aren’t on the cruise. We find river cruising an expensive but efficient form of travel vacation; hope you enjoy one soon!

Lyon, France

Everybody knows, and goes to, Paris. Less well-known is the former Roman capital of Gaul: Lugdunum. Never heard of it? Perhaps in its French form: Lyon? Lyon prides itself as France’s gastronomic capital, and as such, it is also arguably the world capital of gastronomy. We’re starting our three week tour of France and Italy with a stop in Lyon.

Old Lyon street scene

Long before Paris was much of anything, Lyon was a bustling city. Its strategic position at the confluence of the Rhône and Saône rivers was quickly assessed by the Romans, where they chose first a fortified settlement then built a city. Its navigable rivers–far into Gaul (France)–made it a trade port, and it eventually became a center for silk weaving, which had an unusual effect on its culinary traditions (more to follow).

It’s a beautiful city, with an impossible number of fine restaurants. Paul Bocuse, the legendary French chef who died in 2018, set up shop here, and his influence is deeply felt. Hundreds of aspiring chefs still train at his Institute, and the quality of culinary artistry in the city is very high. So we decided to spend a few days in Lyon before heading off on a river cruise down the Rhône.

Even the airline snacks are better!

After a day-and-a-half of flight delays and diversions (nothing serious), AeroMexico and Air France finally got us and our luggage to Lyon. Adjusting our eating habits to the French style was as difficult as overcoming jet lag. We arrived at 7:00 pm: early dinner time for the French. Our bodies were on -7 hour time (or lunch), and we had had a series of meal and snacks on the plane. So we went out for a light meal before bed. We stopped at Food Traboule, which deftly combines two Lyonnais traditions.

The first is the traboule, a series of secret or non-obvious passageways which honeycomb the city. They developed in the Middle Ages as covered routes for deliverymen to bring fresh products across town without being exposed to the elements (or thieves). They doubled as covert smuggling routes (or for liaisons of a sort) from then on. The second is the tradition of the independent chef. Put those two together, and about five years ago some aspiring chefs bought row houses, knocked down adjoining walls, and opened Food Traboule. You enter into a series of rooms with single-chef stalls, preparing a limited menu which you order directly from the chef. Sit wherever you want, and order whatever you want and pay the chef directly; waiters drop by to get you drinks from a central bar. It’s a cross between a Michelin star restauarant and a Mall food court! The beauty is you get to try out new concepts from up-and-coming chefs, cheaply and easily, without commiting to a full meal or menu. Just in the room we visited, you could find a stall with South Asian-Middle Eastern fusion, another with French gourmet hot dogs, and a third with French-Mexican mixes.

Judy awaits her selection

The next morning, we went out to join the French breakfast tradition: an espresso with a croissant or baguette on the way to work. We found many cafes did not open until 8:30 or 9:00 (when does work start?). The fresh pastry was delicious, the coffee strong but very good. After breakfast we got in some sight-seeing, visiting the main Cathedral for Lyon, then taking a funicular line up to the newish (19th Century) Basilica Notre-Dame de Fourvière (with Romanesque and Byzantine flourishes). It resides next to the well-preserved Roman amphitheater, each a unique architectural structure with bold views of the city below.

They wouldn’t let me drive the funicular.
Roman amphiteater, still in use

Now we normally eat one large meal a day (around 2:00 pm), with a small snack in the morning or evening. The French eat lunch between 12:00 and 2:00 pm, and don’t start dinner before 7:00 pm, so there was no way to square that with our style. We decided to go all in at 12:00, so we tromped in to the legendary bouchon Chabert et fils. There are many origin stories for the term bouchon, but the concept is firmly rooted in the silk-weaving story. Wives of the silk workers banded together to buy cheap meat parts (think brains, tripe, sweetbreads) from local butchers, then slow-cooked them into hearty meals for their husbands to return to after work. Eventually this evolved into a culinary tradition of family-owned businesses featuring a daily prix-fix (set price) menu of such hearty fare, a tradition which continues to this day.

As starters (entree here, a matter of some confusion for Americans), we chose a warm goat cheese pastry and a cold pâte pastry with a tart side salad:

pâte in foreground

Next, we had a pike quenelle ( a creamy pastry) and garlic flank steak with hash browned potatoes:

Note the crawfish sauce on the Quenelle!

For dessert, a Guignol (named after a Lyonnias marionette character, but this dessert is a puffy cake with flamed crème and candied oranges) and a chocolate cake, both drenched in cream:

With espresso to cleanse the palate:

A statue of the Sun-King (Louis XIV) with appropriate backdrop:

In the Place Bellecour, a huge central plaza

The city has twenty Michelin-star restaurants, but more importantly, thousands more excellent places to eat which draw upon the unique culinary history and the impressive modern example of chef Paul Bocuse. You don’t have to spend a fortune to eat well, and the fine cuisine does NOT come with a side order of attitude one might encounter elsewhere (at least in our experience). My mauvais français was warmly received as an attempt at communication, and every waiter seemed to know more than enough anglais. As we like to say, when in Lyon, make sure and wear your eatin’ pants!

A compromise, anyone?

Ignore the Press. Stop re-tweeting, and close your social media. Put aside your worst fears and let’s reason together. Things may have just changed (maybe not), but that change was inevitable.

If you read my post back in November (Woeful Roe), you were not surprised by the text of the recent leak of the first draft opinion in the Supreme Court case of Dobbs v. Jackson, overturning the precedent of Roe v. Wade and re-energizing the national abortion debate. If you welcome personal ethics, you were probably appalled by the leak itself, a serious breach of decorum, which is, after all, that thin veneer of civilization that stands between us and the Twitterverse. That should be the opinion of all people of goodwill, regardless of their views of the draft text and decision.

I take no special pride in early identifying the reasoning Justice Alito used in his draft: his reasoning was there for all to see, if one cared to look, in decades of pro-life legal scholarship. One hardly needed a psychic to see this result coming, and it was precisely the result Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg feared when she said “Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped may prove unstable” about Roe v. Wade.

Much of the resulting coverage in the press has bordered on hysteria. Headlines predict a return to the bad old ’50s, or to the dark medieval ages, or to the future dystopia of The Handmaid’s Tale. Oddly enough, with “nones” being the second-largest belief group in America and traditional religious participation plummeting, from where will all these fanatical religious leaders come? As to the perceived end of privacy rights, another conjured apocalyptic possibility, those spreading it seem to ignore Alito’s own text (in the draft) which specifically outlines why Roe and abortion are different, and the other privacy rights (e.g., gay marriage, interracial marriage, contraception) remain standing precedents. And majority opinions are binding, which is not the case for dissents.

If you foresee this, I suggest investing in red wool and white linen.

Why the hype? I always point out it is important to ask the question “who benefits?” whenever such hype occurs. In this case, Democrats smell an issue to energize their base in the face of possibly calamitous November mid-term elections. And I note the GOP feels the same way: notice how quiet they’ve been, fearing the Dobbs decision could complicate what they saw as a sure thing! One should never be surprised when politicians sway with the wind on what others feel are life-and-death issues. The GOP famously welcomed the pro-life movement with mostly rhetorical support for decades, and only the emergence of the Trump phenomenon actually resulted in pro-life actions. Meanwhile, for all my Democratic and Progressive friends, I remind them thus it always was for them, too. President Obama had a super-majority (filibuster-proof) in the Senate and a majority in the House in 2009. He promised he would codify Roe into federal law as one of his first acts in office, thus obviating the decision for the Supreme Court. And he never did it.

We are (as a nation) going back, but only to 1973, the year Roe was promulgated. That decision ended discussion on abortion, because there can be little discussion about fundamental rights. Some states allowed abortion then (a novelty) while most proscribed it. Then the Supreme Court stated the discussion was over. Now it resumes. I do feel empathy for those who demonstrate such grief about the pending decision, and it is the empathy of a shared experience. For those on the pro-life side, it is the same emotion we felt in ’73, and for almost fifty years since. It is the sense something has changed, something has been taken away that once was sacred, and now all things are different. The difference is, this time the pro-choice side can continue to discuss the issue and how it plays out in every state. After Roe, the pro-life side was practically grasping at legal straws. It was only the weakness of Roe’s reasoning and the persistence of the pro-life argument that eventually won the day, and that took five decades.

So on what is there to compromise? I said I would go first:

First off, I want every child welcomed into our nation. I support three months of full-paid maternity leave (does it need to be more?). I want universal coverage for prenatal care, delivery, and well-baby care. I think we should have more generous child-care support, and not limit it to working mothers. I want to reinstate and make permanent the child support provisions made under the stimulus act to alleviate childhood poverty. I don’t want new federal bureaucracies: give the money directly to parents or in vouchers for services rendered, and don’t limit access based on non-relevant criteria (e.g., no religious prohibitions). I will support tax increases to fund the same, as long as they are partnered with reductions in programs that are obviated by these measures.

Won’t this recreate the “welfare queens” phenomenon identified by President Reagan? Maybe, but only at the margins. No one seriously thinks there are large numbers of women making babies to get a check; the income doesn’t equal all the costs. Will there be someone. somewhere, who does? Yes. So what? Every program has people who cheat or game it, but we don’t end all the programs, because they work for the most part. Whatever the impulse (or lack of thought) behind any pregnancy, I want it to result in a child who grows up with great potential. And that means a healthy pregnancy, a safe birth, loving parents(!) and early childhood development in a safe and thriving environment. We tried the “cut-off the resources” approach, and we ended up with a sickly, poorly educated, and maladjusted cohort. That’s failure with a capital “F”. Time for something new.

I still want a nation-wide ban on abortion, perhaps through a personhood statute, but maybe that will take time. In the meantime, the programs I mention (and any others you would like to recommend) should work to eliminate the economic argument for abortion, especially for the poor. Now that we are not arguing about a fundamental right, can people agree there are hard and easy cases? Is there anyone who supports a woman’s right to abort a fetus because it may not have the designer characteristics she bargained for during in vitro fertilization? Or have a late-term abortion because she’s up for a promotion? What about forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest? These are hard cases, and all of them are fractions of the total issue. Small fractions, but nonetheless tragic cases with real world effects. Can we not find compromises here? If we make exceptions to an abortion ban for rape and incest, what are the protections so it doesn’t become a convenient excuse? Remember, Roe began with a mother’s health, but that was interpreted to include her mental and economic well-being, so this is an argument with a history.

I’d like a greater commitment to supporting adoption at all levels of government, with an emphasis on adoption within the country. Remove adoption from the culture wars surrounding church & state or gay rights: there are many ways to facilitate adoption, with too many children and not enough adopting parents. Let people and the agencies who run the process work it out as they see fit.

Want to provide more contraceptives? I’m against all but Natural Family Planning, but can we compromise on supporting those which are clearly not abortifacient (preventing implantation as a back-up)? Make them free (they’re not costly now).

I’d like to see a suite of pro-family policies at the state and federal level, encouraging nuclear families and parents who stay married. It’s not about judging people whose marriages fail: it’s simply about the obvious fact that the children do best in a stable, nuclear family. So we want more of that, please.

word!

Pro-choicers are feeling the dread, man. Pro-lifers are expectant (pun intended), but they know that now the real work begins. Once Roe is gone, the nation can begin to have an adult discussion about a very serious issue. Oh, there will be political demagogues doing what they always do. There will be pundits saying crazy things just to rile you up. There will be cases of overplaying the laws and that will infuriate both sides. Yes, we could just fall back on posting our favorite memes and hashtags, caricaturing the other side as outlandish and reveling in the praise of the like-minded. Or we could have that discussion, compromise, and get on with our lives and our nation’s future.

I’d really like to hear about where you think the compromises may be!

Book Review: The Dumbest Generation Grows Up

This short work is a follow-up by author Mark Bauerlein, who wrote the original The Dumbest Generation in 2008. It’s bombastic, clever, and sad, with the net effect of “I told you so” about the Millennial Generation. Millennials probably should not read this work, or should do so only in a safe space with a therapy app open on the cell phone. Indeed, most Millennials will not understand this book, so filled with classical education references to which they were never exposed. But they are very attuned to derision, and the tone here is relentlessly derisive. What they may miss, again, is that the author empathizes with them: his anger is directed not at them, but rather at their Boomer parents and educators, who failed to prepare them for life. . . and now it is too late.

Part Two: this will not end well!

The book includes endless footnotes and references for those inclined to review the data or who choose to argue with his thesis, but I would suggest reading it simply to ask and answer this question: does it ring true? While I am no longer in the working world, it does track with my experiences about Millenials’ lack of familiarity with the great concepts or works of Western Civilization, and how that infantilizes their world view.

((Writer’s note: we have two daughters and two sons-in-law, all Millennials, although they are from the oldest part of the Millennial generation, which largely grew up before cell phones and screen time were such a challenge. They exhibit few of the characteristics the author describes, which leaves one with hope that perhaps there is an older group of Millennials still ready and available to lead going forward!))

Bauerlein’s work describes Millennials as a generation which has lost the art of deep-reading (my term), that is reading something of substance that requires reading, re-reading, digesting, and maybe even discussing before thinking one has learned something. In its place, they have screen time, either passively receiving info curated for them by various apps/services, or engaging in ephemeral online interactions with peers and friends. On top of this, educators gradually abandoned the notion of civics, prerequisites, and “Western Civ”-ilization at the same time, meaning students were taught a melange of disconnected (but diverse!) myths and stories, told there is nothing special or good about their own background, and asked how that made them feel. The short answer is confused, but resentful.

An interesting part of the book is his recounting of the history of Western Civ as the core curriculum at Stanford. Bauerlein tells how educators at Stanford quickly abandoned the core requirement in classical knowledge for an increasingly diverse course-offering that the students found (also increasingly) “incoherent.” Faced with negative student feedback, the administration responded by doubling down, reducing the core requirement and introducing a new purpose: not to master any classical concepts, but to interrogate why anyone/anywhere thought such things were important to learn in the first place! The answer (i.e., white male supremacists wanted to maintain their power) should surprise no one.

Yet the more powerful part of the book is about the prison conversion of Malcolm X (no, I am not kidding). Using the activist’s writings, Bauerlein covers how he transitioned from a clever, violent criminal to a prisoner then an activist, intellectual philosopher, albeit one in support of a repugnant cause (the Nation of Islam). Malcolm X was, of course, no Millennial; in fact he died as Generation X was only beginning. But he was an archetype for the Millennials: clever but uneducated, with no understanding of the country or society in which he lived. Like a reptile, he simply existed and thrived doing whatever it takes, until in prison he met a older inmate of learning who opened his eyes to a larger world of books and reading. He started by reading and transcribing a dictionary (in order to even understand the other books he wanted to read), then worked his way through most of what was considered the Western Canon: the great works of literature and philosophy. That this led him to the race-baiting Nation of Islam is irrelevant: it gave him a purpose in life, which he previously lacked.

Bauerlein’s point is that all youth, everywhere, need a mythos to start with: something tangible to hang their hat on as they become adults. No culture, no country, no race, no sex, nor anyone is without guilt and sin, but a person lacking a mythos is truly pitiable: they are subject to the whims of fancy: what’s trending on Twitter? What gets the most “likes”? Who shared what on Instagram or TikTok? Lacking depth–the depth of experience gained reading about those who’ve come before us, good or bad–the Millennials are left to their own devices (literally), or to the noise of the online crowd.

I found that much of his thesis rings true; you may disagree. But if you do, I ask you to do this: find a Millennial, and ask them a few questions that any Boomer (most of my friends and associates are Boomers) should be able to answer. From where does the phrase “from each according to his abilities. . .” come? What’s the difference between the Old and New Testaments? What contributed to the Fall of Rome? What’s the significance of Guernica?

C’mon, you know this! Picasso? The horror of war?

You and I could debate the answers. I’ll bet most Millennials would not even understand the questions! The reflexive retreat by Millennials to defensive feelings are a result of this educational deficiency: and that won’t change until it is rectified. Malcolm X showed it is still possible to do so later in life, so perhaps there is some hope. Of course, his example also reminds us that when one has been led to believe in nothing, one can believe in almost anything!

Overall, it’s an interesting read, probably too over-the-top to convince those with opposing views, who would refuse to consider the footnoted data. The most convincing part of the book is how it unlocks some of the puzzles of the Millennial generation, although the answers it suggests are frankly terrifying.

The unbearable lightness of . . . bollocks

What could this mean? Old friends will recall I have a longstanding love affair with the English language. Being born an native English-speaker is a gift; it is an easy language to learn, but a difficult one to master. It is rich, so rich, because it borrows from everywhere and everything, and keeps growing and changing. But not everything is new and better. My daughter liked to complain about “new and improved” products as a redundancy, since a new product should always be improved and an improved product was by definition new. For my part, I fought the good fight against “impact” as a verb (because one hadn’t learned the difference between “effect” and”affect”), enormity (which means ONLY a great and evil thing, not large), and fulsome (which is fake, not real) praise. I can hear my friends and associates chuckling: the fight goes on.

Yet the degradation continues. “Fake news” would only mean something if it wasn’t news, that is, not new. If it’s false, it is simply a lie. Treason is a crime with very specific circumstances, and one should not claim it if one doesn’t know what they are (a declaration of war and two witnesses are among the criteria). The same goes for an “insurrection.” Racial equity is a new, friendly-sounding buzz-phrase on the left, which points to equal representation in outcomes. I doubt anyone would support it for their local NBA team.

Politicians have been masters in abusing language for a long time, and it has become a high (or is that low?) art form today. I waited for then-President Trump to tweet that Joe Biden was “a known bibliophile” hoping no one thought too much about what the phase really meant (Trump wasn’t smart enough to know the word, and Biden isn’t one, anyway). Maybe next time (shudder). Politicians brought us such wonders as “that statement is no longer operative” (as in, “we lied”), “mistakes were made” (“we were wrong”), and “it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is” (He “did have sex with that woman.”).

But many normal folks engage in the same sophistry (look it up). They share and re-tweet garbage because they agree with it, without stopping to think: is it true? Is it a dodge? Or better yet–what does it say about me when I endorse it? And so it goes. I can’t count the number of social media arguments I have been induced to engage in because the language was so indistinct (I know, it’s a personal failing: mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!)

The effects (there’s that word) are many and not harmless. English is beautiful because it is so adaptable and has so many shades of meaning. This started to dawn on me when I first studied German and French, but really hit home as I learned Spanish. I asked my Spanish teacher what the equivalent was for the verb “to wait”? “Esperar,” he said. “To hope for?” “Esperar.” “To expect?” “Esperar.” Yes there are other Spanish words, but the general usage is toward a single verb. In English, even a child can express the very significant differences between “I wait for parents”, “I hope for parents”, and “I expect parents.”

Today, if you’re not anti-racist, you’re racist (from the left), while the right has taken to calling everything “grooming.” Unprecedented is an adjective which apparently means only “I haven’t heard of it.” I have yet to meet a person who would defend the degraded, modern usage of “love”: I would love to do so, if only to impact their vocabulary (ugh, it hurt to write that). Sloppy speaking or writing is a sign of poor thinking. It is the close cousin of vulgarity, where a rude term is used strictly to shock and offend.

Oh, and the title? It’s a riff on the novel The Unbearable Lightness of Being, a philosophical story which also touches briefly on linguistic abuse. I originally used bulls!t, but it seemed to me to be a bit too vulgar. We’ve watched a lot of British crime dramas lately, and I like their use of bollocks (literally, testicles), which connotes complete rubbish or nonsense. I strongly recommend using it. You’ll affect your opponents, and no one would dare give you fulsome praise. And you’ll avoid the enormity of disfiguring the language of Shakespeare, Yeats, and Eliot.

Advice for new or aspiring lakeside expats

The gradual ebbing of the Covid pandemic, the continued retirement of the baby boomer generation, and the abiding allure of lakeside all conspire to one end: more expats are showing up once again in Chapala, Ajijic, and other communities lakeside. I realize my blog may not be the easiest to search for what I have written in the past, so I decided to recount and update my thoughts for those who are recently arrived. And here they are, in no particular order:

  • Expats have been coming here for decades. The first ones were real pioneers: no internet, one long-distance phone in the plaza, as many horses as cars on the streets, few imported American products, no real pizza (the horror!). So they came to a sleepy Mexican fishing village which got overrun sometimes on weekends and holidays with Tapatios (people from Guadalajara). Now it’s crowded (to them) all the time, there are Gringos everywhere, and even US-style politics intrudes. The old-timers don’t like it. Try to be understanding of them, because in many cases they can’t–or don’t want to–just pick up and move. But here and now is not what it once was, and they miss it.
  • Which leads to online boards and FaceBook groups. People here are friendly. People online are not. It’s a phenomenon the world over; my wife calls it “the angry guy in his underwear sitting alone at home and yelling at his computer.” Only it’s not just guys. Just like ordinary people, when alone in their cars, act outrageously because they feel anonymous, people online get snippy in ways they never would in person. So ignore them. But do learn how to search for things on whatever online source you choose before you ask the same question three-thousand gringos have asked.
  • Like anywhere, the cultural and political and ethnic mix at lakeside is changing. There have been past waves of arrivals: originally many artistic types, then Viet Nam vets and hippies, then baby boomer retirees and now even young families. Mexico’s middle class, a relatively recent development, is also discovering both lakeside and retirement, leading to more permanent Tapatios and Chilangos (Mexico City folks). They come for a variety of reasons, and stay for the clima (weather), cultura (friendly culture), and comida (food). All really are welcome here. Some folks still think everybody here is just like them, but that’s just because they don’t socialize widely enough. Whatever your background/interest/politics, you’ll find like-minded friends here.
  • All those arrivals highlight a glaring lack of infrastructure. Things like banks and hospitals and restaurants and internet service providers have grown amazingly, but water and power and roads have not kept up. Mexico is not known for its infrastructure planning, and lakeside is still peripheral enough (to government) and growing so fast as to have problems. None of these problems are catastrophic, and eventually enough Mexicans-with-connections will live here to force change. But in the meantime, your community well may run dry, or the power may be intermittent, the internet abysmally slow in the afternoon, the traffic lights un-timed. It’s Mexico’s way of telling you to slow down and enjoy the view. If that really bothers you, oh well, but don’t think you can change Mexico.
  • The price of things is a source of constant argument here. Not the actual price, but whether that price is cheap or expensive. If you come from an expensive city (like we did), everything is cheaper. If you come from a small town, house prices may shock you. If you insist on buying only American-branded products specially imported to lakeside, you might blanch after doing the math (as a quick rule, it’s twenty Mexican pesos to the dollar, or drop a digit and divide by two: 100 pesos becomes 10, divide by two equals five dollars). Remember, the Mexican brand may be identical, or may not, but it will always be less expensive. Expats get into endless (and in my opinion needless) arguments about whether to tip like NOB (North of the Border), or whether to support WalMart or the neighborhood tienda, or visiting the tianguis or the Gringo market. Here’s a clue: do as the Mexicans do. They don’t argue about such things. You do you. Life is hard enough that one should not waste one’s time arguing about its flavors.
  • Which is easy to do because the weather here is so amazing. Now those old-timers will swear it was better before, but they are getting older and more temperature sensitive. I used to run in the sleet and freezing rain NOB. After five years here, I shiver when I encounter anything below sixty degrees Fahrenheit. It happens. The average monthly temperature has not gone above a high of 87° or below a low of 41°. The rain falls mostly at night and mostly during a rainy season from June to October. We are at mile-high elevation (think Denver) and the latitude of Hawaii. This area should be a high desert plateau (like Phoenix), but the mix of the tropical latitude and lake-effect create a lush, mild, constant micro-climate. Even nearby Guadalajara is more extreme (hotter in summer, colder in winter, rainier in the season). Is it perfect? Not if you like hot humid beach weather, or Fall, or cold clean air. But it is ideal to be outside as much as you like. I tell friends that we just don’t have WEATHER here: I never think about the temperature or precipitation before leaving the casa. And even when it does get hot (never humid), it yields every night. Here’s the data:
And you can see why some expats go on vacation in May; it’s nice many other places, and it’s the only time it ever gets “hot” here
  • Lakeside is neither Florida, nor Arizona nor Texas. Some new expats may be fooled into thinking–by the sizable expat population–that here is much like those other places. That thinking will leave you surprised and annoyed. Mexico is a very different place: give it a chance and you may fall in love with it. But if you expect The Villages with tacos, you’ll be disappointed.
  • Mexicans lakeside are friendly in a small-town Mexican way. They greet strangers on the street and when entering a store or restaurant. Learn the proper use of “buenos dias, buenos tardes, buenos noches” and use it. And of course gracias and por favor. It’s not much, but it’s an attempt to accommodate yourself to the culture, and the Mexican people will welcome it.
  • To learn or not to learn Spanish? Another frequent expat point of debate. The old-timers didn’t have a choice: learn Spanish or be very lonely. Now there are many vendors who are bilingual, and specialists who will escort you through anything from a hospital visit to the dreaded encounter with the Mexican government bureaucracy. Mastering a new language is hard for everyone over the age of five, with the exception of a few people who have a knack. It’s especially hard for those of us getting on in years. But you should make an attempt. There are resources to help you whatever your learning style. You may never be fluent, but if you practice, you will be able to communicate, and the Mexicans you talk to will help you, and appreciate your effort.
  • Unlike the States and Canada, Mexico’s laws and style of regulation descend from a Spanish inheritance. I like to describe Mexican law as “the pirate code” as in, “more of a guideline than a rule.” Bureaucracy is a fine art here, and petty bureaucrats seem to enjoy being exacting. And there are ways around everything if money or connections are involved.
  • I think the concept of time is the single biggest difference between Mexico and cultures NOB. Life moves slower in Mexico. It’s not efficient, it’s not cost effective, but it is pleasant if you move with it. Work hours are variable. There are breaks (siestas) for naps or chores or visits with the family during the work-day. Reservations are approximate; parties start about two hours after they start, and last forever. It’s not that Mexicans are never in a hurry: watch out for Tapatios on the carretera during the weekend: driving in non-existent lanes or even on the bike path to pass traffic! It is more like if you’re NOT in a hurry, don’t BE in a hurry. You will get there when you get there; the work will get done when it gets done. This can be frustrating to type-A, can-do, “time is a-wasting,” time-is-money gringos. Learn the concept of mañana. It literally means both tomorrow and morning, but figuratively means everything from “just after midnight” to someday or even never. And that’s ok.
  • About that traffic. Another quick start to an expat argument is the traffic around these parts. Mention it, and old-timers will remind you when there were no traffic lights. City folk (like me) will chuckle: you call this traffic? Others lament the twenty or forty or sixty minutes to get across town . . . in a small fishing village. Here’s the thing: We have too few roads and too many cars, especially when the tourists come in for holidays and the snowbirds visit. There are no good places to put more roads. Traffic lights only work to facilitate traffic flow if (1) they are timed and coordinated and (2) people obey traffic laws. Neither happens in Mexico. So for example in San Antonio Tlayacapan, people complain and lights go in, causing back-ups, so the lights go intermittent or get taken down: rinse and repeat. Timing and Coordinating the lights? See my comment about infrastructure. Obeying traffic laws? See my comment about the pirate code. Your best bet is to slow down (unless you’re really in a hurry, and ask yourself “why?”), and either turn up your air conditioning, or roll down your windows and people watch.
  • Mexico is as diverse a country and culture as the States or Canada: go and visit it! There are excellent low-cost airlines and terrific interstate and intercity, cheap-but-luxurious bus lines. Drive the autopistas (toll roads called cuotas by the gringos, but that just means “tolls”), which are somewhat expensive (remembering the relativity therein) but safe and fast. Most people know the Atlantic and Pacific resorts, but there are natural wonders (Copper Canyons, Barrancas del Cobre, rivaling the Grand Canyon or Morelia for the Monarch butterflies), Colonial cities (Guanajuato, Querrétaro, Puebla), arts centers (San Miguel de Allende) and of course, the big enchilada: Ciudad de Mexico (just México to the Mexicans, which leads to all those confusing road signs and airport monitor listings). There are guided tours, or just find a gringo with more experience and travel with them. Lakeside is great, but it is even better as a base to explore everywhere else in Mexico.
  • Travel around Mexico? What about all the crime, the cartels, Narcos? Let’s get real. I wrote here and again here about the criminal threat to gringo expats and tourists. The gist of it is: if you don’t use, buy or sell drugs, if you don’t stay out all night partying and drinking, if you don’t flash cash or I-phones or jewelry, if you don’t get drunk in public, the chances of falling prey to the cartels is minimal. Not zero, but unlikely. Do you do those things at home? Probably not, because they are unsafe; same here. The data show Mexico is no more dangerous than Japan for American expats and visitors. If you want to be extra safe, consult the US State Department travel advisory page here. Pay no attention to the general warning (“Reconsider travel”), it is boilerplate language intended for newbie travelers who think a US passport is some kind of international travel protection. Go to the state or region page for where you want to travel, and read the section on restrictions for US governmental personnel. This highlights the specific places (like towns or roads or neighborhoods) which the US government wants its employees to avoid because there is evidence of recent violence there. They are more cautious than most visitors need to be, but it’s an excellent resource. The most common crime problems locally are petty thefts and purse snatchings. Which doesn’t make for much of a TV series.
  • Speaking of governments, Mexico has one, and you are not welcome to engage in its politics. The language is right there in Article 33 of the Mexican constitution. Now you would have to be a pretty big, public nuisance to warrant deportation, but Mexico is especially sensitive to foreign pressure or influence (invaded six times), so leave your political opinions about Mexico to yourself or your immediate gringo buddies. It’s only polite (educado) and Mexicans are always educado. “But wait, I’m a Mexican citizen” some old-timer will object! Ok, technically (and legally) you can vote and engage in politics, but here’s the larger point. Even if you’re a dual citizen, or here legally as a residente permanante or temporal, you’re still not a Mexican (unless you or your family was originally from Mexico, and you’re a returnee). Residente is a legal status, and remember my comment about Mexican law (it could change any old time). I’m not engaging in the favorite expat argument about whether we’re “visitors” or “residents” or “guests.” Whatever you want to call expats here, we can enjoy the culture and be welcomed into it, but we are not “of” it and never will be. It is a fact worth keeping in mind.
  • Some people claim to have come to Mexico to escape NOB politics; this may be true in a general sense, but I have yet to meet anyone who specifically said “if so-and-so is President, I will move to Mexico” and then done it. There is normally something else involved, and the political part is making a virtue signal out of necessity. That said, it used to be (I am told) that NOB politics rarely raised its ugly head here, but now it is much more common. Not overwhelmingly like it is NOB, but still enough to make things uncomfortable at times. Based on nothing more than opinions I have heard, expats lakeside used to be very liberal and/or libertarian, but now there is a growing number of more traditional and conservative types (I’m in the latter groups: forgive me for I have sinned). One liberal friend told me she didn’t know any conservatives locally; I re-introduced myself (much to her chagrin). My wife likes to say “you never notice us because we’re just quieter.” It’s a good thing to be politically active, to defend your ideas and support your candidate, party, or ideology back home. Just don’t be a bore. I guess I agree with the old-timers who say “if you want to be like that, stay NOB; you’ll have lots of company.”
  • One thing you’ll notice a lot of here at lakeside, especially during snowbird season (November-April) is Canadians/Canadiennes. Most Americans only occasionally run into people from Canada (my daughter, when young, insisted it should be called Canadia), unless you are from a border state. Down here, a significant portion of the seasonal expats are from Canada; I would estimate about forty percent. So you’ll get a chance to mingle with two different groups/cultures: Mexican and Canadian!
  • The reason so many Canadian expats are snowbirds is due to the peculiarities of Canada’s Health Care System, which is Provincial, and which I’m told requires some time in Canada every year. For the rest of us, it is good to know that lakeside has a surfeit of clinics, labs, and even hospitals, while Guadalajara (under an hour away) is Mexico’s center for medical training. It is easy to find a well-trained and credentialed English-speaking doctor, with a full range of services in support. Prices are much less than in the States (almost anywhere is cheaper than the States), but costs are rising as local Mexican health providers determine what price gringos will pay for health care. There is nothing unethical or sinister about that: you’re getting an excellent service customized (language, etc.) to your needs, and you can afford to pay more for it. Free Mexican health care is available and is worth the price you pay (read that twice). Take care with groups offering to bill Medicare or US health care providers back in the States: while there is some interest in the US Congress to authorize a pilot project to permit such coverage, it remains illegal as of now. There are big differences in how Mexican health care functions: what nurses do and how they are trained (more basic in my opinion), who can share health care data (my wife and I do all our visits jointly, and we own our records), and the need to pay before you leave the hospital (or you don’t get to leave). Continuing health problems remain the number one reason expats eventually return NOB.
  • Property and liability insurance are available just like NOB. All insurance decisions are matters of personal risk, but be aware that what is covered and how it is covered may be different here. Some expat home owners do not have property or liability insurance. Why not? For one a casa of brick and concrete is not going to burn down, and we haven’t had a significant earthquake since the nineteenth century. Another reason is Mexicans don’t rush to sue (remember the legal system?), which is also why property owners who have claims denied by insurance companies have a difficult time taking it to the courts. Yes, you must have automobile insurance, but after that it’s up to you and your personal views on risk. If you choose to get insurance, have a long talk with your agent about what is covered, what it takes to file a claim, and what are all the exceptions.
  • That property you may/may not insure is a key factor in whether you stay as an expat or return home. Everyone agrees that renting to experience different neighborhoods and home styles is the right way to go. We and some of our friends bought right away, but I provide this warning: trained professional on a closed course; do not try this on your own! There are simple choices you have to make about indoor/outdoor living, numbers of visitors/bedrooms, whether to walk or have a car/where to park it, whether it feels too hot or too cold TO YOU, western-exposed windows, garden/pet space, even colors vs. heat retention. You’re unlikely to get it all correct in the first try, so take your time.
  • Choosing a neighborhood is a fine art. Some expats head directly for gated communities called condominios. They offer better security, some rules (quiet hours, tree heights) and amenities (club houses, pools, gardening of common areas, parking), some cost-sharing and dues. Other expats, especially old-timers, deride condominios as NOB living, shorn of any contact with real Mexicans. Yet the two condominos we have lived in had as many Mexican owners as gringos. Living in the villages is an authentic expat experience, complete with cohetes, dogs, roosters, cattle, and the family next door who decides to open an evento (party-place) on weekends. Living in the village is less expensive and still nice, the condominios more comfortable to newcomers. The important thing is to know what you like before you settle in.
  • Some lakeside expats appear to treat trips to Guadalajara like adventures to a distant, confusing place, and try to avoid it. Or they just go to the Costco, Home Depot, or a mall (yes, they have many). I suggest visiting regularly, as Mexico’s Second City has so much to offer: museums, sports (futbol, beisbol, and baloncesto), a very nice zoo, theaters and opera and plays and restaurants! Ask friends for suggestions, get a place to stay and investigate the city; it will be rewarding.
  • What goes for Guadalajara goes for all of Jalisco. It’s the home of Tequila in the eponymous village, mariachi music, guachimontones (conical pyramids) and Charrería (Mexican rodeo). Jalisco is to Mexico as Texas is the United States. Jalisco is the more conservative, more Catholic heart of Mexico, with more liberal, more cosmopolitan Guadalajara as its urban center (think Austin). The things people think of as quintessentially Mexican are de Jalisco. Heck, the state’s tourism motto is “Jalisco es Mexico!”
  • One major difference from NOB is the police (Policia). Like up north, there are several types: municipal police, traffic police, state police, federal police, and the new Guardia Nacional. Again like up north, they have different authorities and jurisdictions. Pay is a major impediment to professionalism: the average monthly salary for a police officer in Mexico is $20,000 MXP, or about $500 USD! Some make half that. Equipment and training are spotty. There is the constant threat of drug traffickers and other criminals corrupting police either through graft or threats: “plato o plomo“, that is silver (graft) or lead (a bullet). Is it any wonder police look to petty corruption by requesting bribes for minor traffic violations? Some locals and expats swear by refusing to give a bribe, arguing it prolongs the corruption and the police will generally give in in the end. Others relate tales of cars being towed or a few hundred pesos “solving” the problem. How you choose to deal with it is up to you. For starters, don’t drive a car with foreign plates, do get a Mexican driver’s license, and learn the unique rules of the road. Many of the stories of these run-ins with police begin with not wearing a seat-belt, talking on a cell phone, having expired tags, making an illegal left turn, etc. Know what not to do and avoid the problem.
  • Driving need not be a nightmare. Download the Waze (pronounced Wayze in English, Wah-zay in Spanish), which marries Google maps with real time traffic/police/pothole alerts. We have navigated through backstreets and around gridlock like locals using it. Trust the Waze! Drive slower than normal, as anything can and will happen on the carretera: people and things falling out of trucks, cattle in the highway, topes (speed-bumps) without warning signs or warning signs without topes, scooters passing on any side, pedestrians scurrying across major highways (what do you think all those roadside shrines are for?), five lanes in the space marked for three, even cars coming slowly the wrong way! You name it, we’ve seen it in Mexico. Mexico uses fewer manned police speed-traps, but does make use of speed cameras which (in Jalisco) must have a warning sign placed before the camera. So there are many such signs, with fewer cameras, and one quickly learns where you need to slow down, as the cameras don’t move around very often. So yield and go with the flow, and don’t be in a hurry. And remember, if anyone is seriously hurt in a traffic accident, all the drivers involved are going first to jail until the policia determine who is at fault. So settle on the spot if you can, know the name and number of your insurance agent, and be careful out there.
  • How have I gotten this far and not mentioned Lago de Chapala, the lake itself? It’s beautiful and is responsible for our microclimate. Expats get into an annual argument about how clean/dirty it is. Someone drags out an environmental group’s analysis claiming it’s so polluted it’s a crime against humanity. Someone else pulls out testing data showing it’s no more polluted than most (beaches/lakes) in (California/New York). Like most things, the truth is somewhere in between. Here’s the thing: the lake is the main source of drinking water for the millions of people in Guadalajara. Yes, the water gets processed along the way, but if it was that bad to start with, there would be plenty of seriously sick people in Guad (yes, gringos call it that). Mexican sewer systems have never been designed to withstand the deluges of the rainy season, so during that season, overflow goes straight into the lake. And that means near the towns and villages there are higher, temporary concentrations of coliform bacteria (the kind that make you sick) during the rainy season. Locals know when to go in the water (they fish in it, etc.) and when not. There are marinas with sail boats, some jet-skis, and an expat kayak club. Some people avoid the water because of abandoned fences, poles, etc. that lurk under the waves; caution is advised.
  • In addition to the healthy climate, we have abundant, healthy fresh foods options. A friend warned me–at the start of the pandemic–that borders might be shut and food become scarce. I responded that we’re the place that sends food elsewhere, so we’ll have plenty to eat if we can’t export it! Yes, you need to wash your fruits & vegetables from the market, although some expats say they never have. And yes, sometimes a fresh salad will give you some, shall we say, digestive discomfort. But in general, you can get really fresh meat, cheese, fruits, vegetables, and of course, tortillas for very good prices (by any standard).
  • Speaking of food, lakeside is a veritable Epcot Center of choices. Ok, maybe a bad comparison. How about the world’s largest food court? Still not right. Suffice it to say we have an incredible number of restaurants focused on expats, and you can find almost any type of cuisine. The cautions? We have only a few amazing, high-end places. Restaurants change hours, staffs, and locations all the time. This means the restaurant that was nearby and great last month may be down this month and better again but far-away two months from now. It’s a very variable food environment, but you can get everything from pizza to sushi to BBQ to burgers to Indian to Chinese to German/French/Italian to Argentine. Even Mexican!
  • Expats are quite involved in the local community beyond eating out at restaurants every day. There are many clubs and too many charitable groups to name, but I know there is one that will float your boat. Get involved. Mexicans view the family as the source of charity, and that leaves many gaps, so this is a welcome way expats can bring a positive aspect of NOB culture with them.
  • All those charitable groups doesn’t stop there from being many people looking for donations on the street. Begging in Mexico isn’t looked down on in the way I felt it was NOB: it’s just viewed here as a fact of life. Beggars in general are not aggressive, and there is no need to fear them. Some people hang out in public places to help you back out of a parking place, or to cross the street. Others stand at topes (where traffic slows) or outside of grocery stores, selling candies or hand-made trinkets. Feel free to buy from them, give to them, or just greet them, but not judge them, por favor!
  • Likewise, you’ll see many street dogs or roof dogs. The latter are a form of security, as Mexicans (mostly) view dogs as working animals, not pets. The former may or may not be on their own–some locals let their dogs wander during the day. Which leads to all the dog carcasses one sees on the carretera to Guadalajara. There are very active dog (and other pet) shelters run by expats; they even export dogs to the States! But dog-lovers may find the Mexican approach to dogs (and its results) challenging.
  • That carretera to Guadalajara runs past our international airport, which is between lakeside and Guad and only thirty minutes away (if you drive like the proverbial bat-outta-hell). It’s officially Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla Aeropuerto Internacional, but GDL for short. You can catch non-stops to hubs at Dallas (American), Houston (United), and Atlanta (Delta), along with others to Los Angeles and Chicago. GDL is a small airport, albeit Mexico’s largest for freight. It is due for a major renovation and expansion in the next few years. As a tip, there is a secure parking lot at the airport, and other park-n-ride options near it: we used both many times with no issues.
The Goat Sucker: A Very bad Neighbor!
  • Speaking of issues, one which always surprises new expats is noise. Mexico is a noisy country. As I write this, I’m being serenaded by gardeners employing the country’s favorite musical instrument: the leaf blower. Here it is known just as the blower, because it is used for all forms of blowing: leaves, clothes, trash, insects, animals, other blowers, or just because. Mexicans love to set off fireworks (cohetes) for any reason. Lakeside retains small farms and indigenous properties where animals live side-by-side with their owners, in the village. You’ll hear dogs (of course), roosters, birds, cows, horses and the occasional chupacabra (Ok, I made the last one up . . . I think). Locals celebrate with long and loud parties (fiestas) that may be held at an evento or at home, complete with bands and dancing and singing to the wee hours. Even Mother’s Day has a tradition here of serenading Mom by having a band play songs under her window . . .at the crack of dawn. There are laws about noise, but they are more honored in the breach. Either get used to it, buy earplugs, or get invited and join in. All three work equally well.
  • Finally, speaking of holidays and fiestas, here’s a tip: get a calendar, one with all the Mexican federal holidays AND all the Saints’ days. “Why?” you ask. Mexicans take their holidays seriously and they celebrate all the federal holidays, Catholic holidays, and local Saint’s days (for example, the parish’s patron Saint). If you don’t know what they are, you’ll always be the one asking “what was with all the cohetes last night?” or “where did all the traffic come from?” or “why is the street closed?” Here’s a pro-tip: for the Catholic holidays, Mexicans often practice a novena, which is supposed to be nine days of prayer and fasting leading up the the celebration of the Saint. In Mexico it has become nine days of fireworks, or bands, or whatever leading up to the Saint’s day. So also know the names of local parishes and plot the novena out on your calendar. For example, San Andrés is Ajijic’s main parish, and his feast is November 3oth. The national (Mexican) feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe is December 12th. Christmas (La Navidad) is December 25th, and Three Kings’ Day (Tres Reyes, when presents arrive in Mexico) is January 6th. Plot that out on your calendar, and you’ll soon realize there are non-stop parties (and many business closures) from American Thanksgiving through the end of the NFL regular season (to use secular America holidays as an example). Consider yourself warned!

I hope you enjoyed reading this stream-of-consciousness review as much as I did writing it. As always, there are way more details hidden away in blog posts and through authoritative websites. But I hope this gives you a flavor of expat life–if you’re just considering it–or eases your arrival if you’ve already made the jump.

Observations from America

We just came back from our annual Spring visit to see our grandson in Ohio. Some thoughts on what’s changed, what hasn’t, or just what I noticed, in no particular order.

  • Covid is done. Over. No mas as we say. Yes, it is still circulating, and there will be more variants, and some people will need more boosters, and others will get sick and may even die. But the heavy weight that was the pandemic is lifting. We didn’t see a mask after we left the airport. They are not required in Ohio; although businesses may require them, they don’t. Covid is becoming an endemic disease not as defined by the medical community, but in the res publica, the community. People have decided to move on. It would take something truly shocking to change that direction, and a CDC announcement won’t do it.
  • People are a little friendlier. With masks gone, and with limited human contact for so long, people seem just a little more open to a “good-day” or a “hello.” I’m not talking a habitual “buenos dias” here, but still, it’s noticeably friendlier. However . . .
  • There are still many people on the edge of losing it. As in becoming violent for little or no reason. I did not see such things, but the news and social media are full of stories. Road rage, kids bringing guns to school, attacks on flight attendants, hey even let’s slap-the-crap-out-of-Chris Rock on national television. It may be years before all this suppressed anger works its way out of the body civil and politic.
  • Inflation is real, it is increasing, it is a problem, everyone is talking about it, and the administration has no idea what to do about it. On past visits, everybody was talking about Covid; now it’s prices. And all the government and political talking heads are saying is gibberish about who is to blame. It bears repeating that government at all levels has difficulty dealing with inflation, but it’s not like the US (and other countries) have never experienced it before. It won’t get better for a long time, because nothing is being done.
  • I know change is a constant, but sometimes it hits you when you least expect it. We flew to Chicago (tip for lakeside expats: Delta/AeroMexico have non-stops to/from O’Hare!) and drove to Cincinnati. As we left the Chicago suburbs in neighboring Indiana, I told my dear wife we would be driving on I-65, a rural interstate highway to Indianapolis, so traffic would be much better. I knew this because I went to high school in the area, and even took part of my driver’s test on that interstate. But that was forty-six years ago and I had no idea how far the sprawl had spread, and how much traffic there was now on that road. And we passed through an immense Windmill farm, too. I’m talking hundreds of the giant creatures, silently spinning over the corn-and-soy fields of Indy. Wow. Meadow Lake windmill farm, over 400 turbines!
And still growing!
  • Speaking of green energy and climate change, I have this story to relate. As we walked and talked about the suddenly cold weather one day, my fifth-grade grandson blurted out, “we’re doing such a terrible job with the environment, the world’s going to end in ten years.” Now, he’s a bright kid, and what he said bore no trace of hyperbole, sarcasm, or irony. He doesn’t watch any TV (except sports) and has limited screen time, which he mostly uses on games or programming (no social media). So I asked him where he heard that; he explained they “spent a bunch of time on it in school.” Just a fact, as he had been taught. Whatever your feelings about climate change, the notion all we have is ten years is a ridiculous assertion, and certainly not appropriate for middle-schoolers. It’s an exaggeration based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report stating we have ten years before we hit another (bad) milestone in the warming of the planet. And we wonder why childhood depression and suicide rates are rising.
  • Political advertising seems to keep finding new lows. There are party primaries approaching in Ohio, and the attack ads are flying full of vitriol. “Liar” is a common descriptor, and I believe I heard at least one “coward.” “Shameful” was frequently invoked, and I agreed, much of the work was shameful.
  • Traffic at airports and on planes has almost recovered. We saw few empty seats and long lines at the airport concessions. We also saw a lot of infrastructure work going on, perhaps related to the bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by Congress and signed by President Biden. Long overdue, and welcome even if it causes some congestion and delays.

Glad to be back from the variable highs and lows of Cincinnati to the sunshine and steady warmth of Ajijic. Here’s hoping that the mask mandate is gone before our next trip in May!

Voting Rights and Wrongs

Another partisan issue is voting; Captain Obvious would agree. After all, voting involves choices among parties (in most places), so who gets to vote and under what circumstances is obviously a matter up for partisan debate. Some democracy advocates would disagree saying “it’s a fundamental human right” and the UN Declaration on Human Rights supports this view. Yet even fundamental rights have limits: children don’t vote, and no one seems to get upset about that.

In the United States, there are two camps–both extreme–currently waging war over voting rights and procedures. On the right, Trump supporters claim the 2020 election was rigged, full of vote fraud which illegally denied then-President Trump a second term. In his supporters’ view, this fraud requires a tightening of voting rules and greater oversight by State elections officials, up to and including the ability to overrule and replace slates of electors in future elections. On the left, the push to enact greater restrictions is seen as an attempt to disenfranchise (mostly) minority voters who vote overwhelmingly for Democratic Party candidates, and to build in an illegal backstop to overrule majorities and ensure Republican electors in the future. Their meme is “Jim Crow 2.0” recalling the many ways southern states denied black Americans their franchise for almost one-hundred years.

As I usually admit, both sides have basic facts to support their contentions, but both exaggerate or outright lie to make a stronger case. Let’s examine the whole truths, shall we?

For starters, the notion everybody has a right to vote. Advocates chant this, but no one, and I mean NO ONE, really believes it. Children (as noted) don’t deserve a vote. People who are unconscious don’t merit a vote. You and I may disagree about how young is too young, or how conscious someone needs to be, or if felons or non-citizens should be allowed to vote. But the principle stands: some people do not have a right to vote. In fact, the original text of the US Constitution said very little about who could vote, other than that if one was eligible to vote in one’s state, one was eligible to vote for federal office. States were left to decide the franchise, that is, who could vote.

Much is made of the sexism and racism of the original state decisions to limit voting to white men who owned property. This was more a case of elitism than anything else (since it disenfranchised more white men than women or blacks). It was elitism to believe (as those passing the laws feared) that large groups of voters could be bought or directed by others. Yet even the white men of property all knew of cases of ‘saloon meetings on election day’ when wealthy candidates bought rounds of drinks for eligible voters in exchange for trips to the voting booths. More voters simply meant more opportunities for fraud in this view.

Election Fraud in the 1800s Involved Kidnapping and Forced Drinking - Atlas  Obscura
Drunk & ready to vote!

And the history of American politics is rife with voting fraud. Anyone familiar with the two centuries of Tammany Hall control of New York City or the Daley machine’s sixty-year run in Chicago knows that such organizations knew precisely how much corruption and vote fraud was needed for every election, from ward member to President. Top those stories off with the hundred years of poll taxes, rigged literacy tests, and violent intimidation of black voters under Jim Crow laws. It was very late in the Twentieth Century that most of the blatant voter fraud and disenfranchisement was wrung out of the US democratic process, at the cost of many new laws and controls.

But’s that all (dirty) water under the bridge: what about today? One cannot see today’s exaggerations for what they are if you don’t know the history!

Let’s start with the fraud claims in the 2020 election. President Trump and lawyers representing him filed sixty-three lawsuits claiming voter fraud. They were heard in a variety of states, under various Republican- (including Trump) and Democratic-appointed judges. All of these suits were denied, most in summary judgments. That is, the attorneys filing the suit made claims, but when asked by the judge to present ANY evidence to support the claimed fraud, they did not do so. So it’s not a matter of not considering the evidence; no evidence was produced. Some lawsuits presented evidence, but never in sufficient numbers to affect the outcome of the election in that state, rendering the suit moot. Some more outrageous claims, like those of rigged voting machines, are not being adjudicated as (disproven) vote fraud accusations but as defamation by the individuals making the claims. Even various recount efforts by pro-Trump organizations and legislatures have failed to find anything which undermines the legitimacy of Biden’s 2020 victory.

Why do so many Trump supporters (and even Republicans in general) still believe the election was rigged after this unbroken record of failure? First off, there is the recent historical precedent. What’s good for the (Democratic) goose is good for the (Republican) gander. Democrats clung to the 2016-election-was-rigged-and-Trump-is-a-Russian-stooge fairy tale to this day, and Trumpers love a good tit-for-tat. Second and more importantly, the 2020 election was held during a pandemic which made for really dicey voting conditions and delayed outcomes. States changed voting rules and procedures, often late in the election cycle, in a genuine attempt to assist voting when gathering in public on election day may not be advised or even permitted. Some of these changes violated State constitutions and were thrown out; most were allowed as prudent responses to an unprecedented situation. In general, these rules favored absentee/early voting.

Nothing wrong with absentee/early voting, although it does require special and different forms of verification than in-person voting. States like Colorado had pioneered the effort and had strong procedures in place. But other states tried to enact new early/absentee processes on the fly, while the government officials responsible for implementation were not even working in-person. This led to debates about fairness, ballot verification, voter identification, drop-boxes, and nursing home ballot harvesting. None of these situations demonstrated any fraud which could have changed the state’s electoral outcome. But they did delay vote total announcements, and that was a major problem.

As predicted by several analysts, the delayed announcements of voting results were inevitable, and had an obvious effect: Republicans tended to favor in-person voting, where rapid processes were in-place that resulted in quick vote totals. Democrats favored absentee or early balloting (the kind that took longer to count). This resulted in election night preliminary results indicating President Trump would be re-elected, and morning-after results showing he lost. Which the President and his supporters were never going to believe, no matter how many recounts, lawsuits or fact checks were done. Hey, some on the left still believe that Al Gore beat George W. Bush, so delusion is bipartisan.

Now some red states are rolling back the pro- early/absentee processes they enacted during the pandemic, and some Democrats are crying foul. The amusing thing here is (1) there is no evidence the changes increased the number of Democratic votes, and (2) there is no evidence the changes increased the total number of votes. The 2020 election was a vast experiment with red and blue states making different choices about voting rules, but with an odd outcome: the changes neither affected the total turnout nor the partisan results. And this tracks with decades of research on the issue. So Republicans are doing something meaningless in terms affecting Democratic voters, and Democrats are fighting it even though it doesn’t make a real difference. This may be the ultimate “no there, there” issue. What did happen is when people voted changed (Democrats early and absentee, Republicans in person on election day), but not the number of people voting. Furthermore, some of the red state changes are the same as or less restrictive than those which already exist in blue states, which hardly is evidence for claims of “Jim Crow 2.0”. Georgia has been the principle battleground for these charges. If you want a solid review of what’s changing and why, Georgia Public Broadcasting has it here. Suffice it to say the changes place Georgia in line with voting processes in New York, and New Jersey, and even Delaware, so Jim Crow is more widespread than we knew.

Gerrymandering remains a problem, but I note that the same folks who decried it as a great Republican threat to American democracy (sic) are now chuckling at the Democratic party’s clever use of it to secure more seats before the 2022 mid-terms. Perhaps it isn’t quite the existential threat some imagined.

States may find a way to limit gerrymandering, but I am not optimistic. It must be done using State constitutions, not the federal one, since the US Supreme Court has called gerrymandering an unfortunate but inevitable fact of electoral life (my words). The move to create new or additional review mechanisms to certify an election is troubling, and might provoke a constitutional challenge if implemented. Oddly enough, some state legislatures once appointed their own choice of federal electors, regardless of the votes cast, in effect treating the vote as a popularity contest. However, once a state commits to using an election to determine slates of Presidential electors, it would be legally dubious to somehow ignore the results and select other electors. And the US House of Representatives need not accept them (another thing which already happened).

Finally, there are those who claim that since there is no widespread evidence of voting fraud, there is no reason for new or additional restrictions on voting. Those holding this view are guilty of the magic amulet fallacy (“See this magic amulet; it keeps away tigers.” “I don’t believe it.” “You don’t see any tigers, do you? It must be working!”). Voter fraud has always been an issue, and it was one mitigated by increasing identification and verification processes. If the states wish to move toward more options for voting (early, absentee, online, whatever) they need to enact more and better processes to prevent voting fraud, which will occur. One need not be an alarmist or a racist or a partisan, just familiar with history and technology, to see why.

In summary, Republicans are attempting to suppress Democratic votes, and vice versa. The fact that one side seems more successful (in passing new rules) is not a moral judgment. More importantly, there is no evidence the changes make the difference that is (privately) believed by the Republicans or publicly-decried by the Democrats! That fifty-state experiment in 2020 showed that the increases in voting, and the partisan shifts, were the same in blue and red states and in states with fewer/more restrictions. The 2020 federal election was legitimate, as was the 2016 one. All that changed is when people voted: Democrats before the election, Republicans on election day.

Most importantly, don’t question the legitimacy of the election process, and remember to vote!